Film Review: Antichrist (2009)
November 27th, 2009 |
A film review by Tyson Stewart
Antichrist (2009, dir. Lars von Trier)
If you’re sick of the now-too-familiar vérité-style horror cinema that has permeated theatres for the past ten years or so, perhaps von Trier’s art-house horror Antichrist will give you something to think about. While Paranormal Activity, a generally vapid remake of a film that is scarcely 10-years-old, resorts to a kind of trendy derivativeness, Antichrist reaches all the way back to films like Haxan (1922), The Seventh Seal (1957), and Mirror (1975) to mount its vision of evil.
A couple’s child accidentally dies while they’re having sex. To help Her (Charlotte Gainsbourg) mourn, He (Willem Dafoe) takes her to the place where she is the most afraid: a cottage in Eden, a forest outside of town. As He treats her with logic and reason, utilizing his skills as a psychologist, She starts tapping in to the mystery and chaos of the surroundings, of nature. Soon enough, we are given new (often very creepy) revelations and things eventually take a violent turn.
What I like about the film is its complex views of nature. For the most part, it treats it like a mirror that we project our own feelings onto. Nature is never the embodiment of evil—only mystery. This is illustrated by a key shot near the beginning, in the hospital room where She is being treated for grief. While the two characters exchange what amounts to sweet nothings, the hand-held camera suddenly locks itself into place and zooms in to some flower stems in a vase. Soon, the entire frame is filled with green, liquid, and long shafts of dark. Moments like this bring about more questions than they answer. And the film builds slowly like this, allowing new things to enter the mind without explicitly saying what they are.
Having two intellectuals (she has an unfinished thesis on the go) at the centre of this horror parable is, of course, no mistake. At the start, we think it’s going to go down the usual route: He, clinging to logic and reason all the time, will get his comeuppances through Her unreason. And this is indeed how most reviewers interpret the film. But notice the shift halfway. When he discovers the pages of her thesis in the attic, we might now be led to believe that she too employs her own brand of reason and logic onto him. She has just as much a powerful intellect as He. It may be subjective and a descendant of medieval practices, but it is reason nonetheless. This is what makes the film scary. Both protagonists appeal to a reason that is in direct contradiction to nature (recall what She does to her son’s feat).
Antichrist is a fitting way to end the last decade of cinema—it’s effectively a reminder and recap of the best art cinema from the past 50 years, pulling together elements from Bergman, Tarkovsky (to whom the film is dedicated), Lynch, and I would add Antonioni (think of those moments when the surroundings become overwhelming and push the characters aside, like her imaginings and the entry into the woods in the car). It might just be the best looking film I’ve seen in over a decade too. Certainly it has the best use of slow-motion in a film for years.
The drawbacks are the usual things of von Trier’s work. Why does he so stubbornly keep to gender roles? And some of the metaphors, when put explicit, are way too easy. I don’t buy how the beginning is dealt with again later on, for instance. But that might already be saying too much.








Recent Comments
Hi Great to see a review about this super cool band - too...
Seriously... this is my favorite album by them - besides may...
i agree completely is this album based on a specific book? t...
Hey people, You don't really understand ASMZ's spirit......
Great list, but in my subjetive vision, I missed some of the...